Reply With Quote
I think you are afraid to continue this conversation.
I don't blame you.
I think it would be more educational for you to excercise your right as a freedom loving american to be a towards a police officer. Go on do it.
I think you are afraid to continue this conversation.
I don't blame you.
Well, for a variety of reasons.
I'm reminded of a story where an old man harangued a cable repairman all the way out to his service vehicle and, then, when the cable repairman got into the van and tried to leave, the old man lurched at the vehicle and got himself run over.
Unreasonable people do unreasonable things.
You're forgetting the officer still hasn't established the location or iden y of the second alleged burglar. He doesn't know who is in the house or what is transpiring. He wanted Professor Gates to follow him outside because it was safer for everyone involved.
handicapped old men that need a cane to walk, don't lurch.
You're forgetting the officer still hasn't established the location or iden y of the second alleged burglar. He doesn't know who is in the house or what is transpiring. He wanted Professor Gates to follow him outside because it was safer for everyone involved.
Right, Gates was going to try to commit suicide by flinging himself (using his cane to propel himself) under a police cruiser. It's all in the report, right?
The report says he wanted to go outside because he claimed he couldn't hear the radio in his kitchen. He never said anything about searching the entire house and never had anyone search the entire house after Gates was arrested. You are making up now.You're forgetting the officer still hasn't established the location or iden y of the second alleged burglar. He doesn't know who is in the house or what is transpiring. He wanted Professor Gates to follow him outside because it was safer for everyone involved.
The old man wasn't trying to kill himself either. Like I said, unreasonably people do unreasonable things and, Professor Gates (by all accounts) was being unreasonable.
The officer asked Professor Gates to come outside to begin with, and he refused. That was the only reason he ended up inside with a belligerent Gates in the first place.
By all accounts he was just yelling. He was not considered a danger to himself or anyone else by the officers. You are making that up.
That's a funny way of trying to avoid admitting you just made up the part about searching the whole house.The officer asked Professor Gates to come outside to begin with, and he refused. That was the only reason he ended up inside with a belligerent Gates in the first place.
By all accounts he was on the officer's ass, yelling, and generally out of control. I don't know what might have happened but, I do know it was possible, in that state, Professor Gates was capable of doing something unexpected that could have resulted in someone getting hurt.
From descriptions, it sounds like the tapes of the event will pretty much demonstrate how out of control Gates was.
I never said he wanted to search the house. I said he hadn't established the whereabouts of the second alleged burglar, didn't know who else was in the house, and didn't know what the was going on in the house.
It was safer outside. And, as you point out, quieter.
I think it was an old man yelling. You are trying to make it out like he was insane. There was nothing in the report that said he was a potential danger to anyone. You really need to quit making up.
Wait, wasn't his entire reason for being there making sure the house was safe? There never made sure the house was safe according to your twisting of the story.I never said he wanted to search the house. I said he hadn't established the whereabouts of the second alleged burglar, didn't know who else was in the house, and didn't know what the was going on in the house.
It was safer outside. And, as you point out, quieter.
You are now accusing the police of leaving a potential crime scene unsecured and criminals free because an old man yelled at them. I simply don't think they are as incompetent as you do.
I'm willing to wait for the tapes.
Because Gates immediately went into his tirade -- during which the officer determined he was the rightful occupant -- and precluded a normal progress of events.
I think it became apparent, to all present, sometime during the fiasco that Gates was the "burglar" and that there was no crime. However, I don't think Gates would have given the officer an opportunity to do that -- check the premises to make sure everything was okay. Do you?
He was an old man yelling from his porch. You want to make it seem like he was running all over the place putting people in fear of their lives. You simply made that up.
But you just said the house was still potentially dangerous. Are you going back on that now since you realized there was absolutely nothing in the police report to support that contention?Because Gates immediately went into his tirade -- during which the officer determined he was the rightful occupant -- and precluded a normal progress of events.
There was no indication in the report that any further investigation was interrupted, and no further investigation was made once after he was arrested. You simply made up your story that the police considered the house to be dangerous.I think it became apparent, to all present, sometime during the fiasco that Gates was the "burglar" and that there was no crime. However, I don't think Gates would have given the officer an opportunity to do that -- check the premises to make sure everything was okay. Do you?
Okay, I never said that. And, putting people in fear of their lives isn't an element of disorderly conduct.
Nope, I don't think the officer(s) on the scene finished the job. Of course, we don't know what they did after the arrest. I know they helped secure the residence before they drove away, though.
I think the officer entered when Gates refused to come outside.
Responding to a burglary in progress call makes the house potentially dangerous.
Who knows, they may have checked the premises after the arrest but, I somehow think they were satisfied by the asshole's explanation that his door had been jammed and it was him that broke in.
You were saying they had to fear he would do something like jump in front of their cars if he left because you heard some guy did that some time.
Wrong, they let a maintenance worker from Harvard do it. It's in the report. Again -- why do you insist on flat out lying?Nope, I don't think the officer(s) on the scene finished the job. Of course, we don't know what they did after the arrest. I know they helped secure the residence before they drove away, though.
So it was still dangerous then and he just stayed in the dangerous situation with the resident of the house. You are accusing him of leaving a potential victim in a dangerous situation.I think the officer entered when Gates refused to come outside.
Right, and you are accusing the officer of leaving the potential victim in the dangerous house.Responding to a burglary in progress call makes the house potentially dangerous.
Actually I know, because it's in the report. You are now accusing the police of lying in the report now on top of your accusations of their being incompetent and reckless.Who knows, they may have checked the premises after the arrest but, I somehow think they were satisfied by the asshole's explanation that his door had been jammed and it was him that broke in.
No, I didn't say that. I related the story of an unreasonable old man that accidentally got himself run over because he was being unreasonable.
They helped in that they asked if Professor objected to letting the maintenance person fix the door. I'm betting an officer stayed behind until the job was done.
I've said that it became apparent some time during the incident that the probability of a burglary in progress occurring was remote.
I'm pretty sure that before he left the house he was convinced there was no longer a danger.
What was in the report? Because, I've read it too.
Look, some time after the officer arrive, I believe he became convinced there was no burglary. Professor Gates' disorderly conduct was "separate and apart" from the original call.
And the only reason you brought it up was to intimate that Gates would do it.
They didn't check for potential burglars, which is what you said made the home dangerous.They helped in that they asked if Professor objected to letting the maintenance person fix the door. I'm betting an officer stayed behind until the job was done.
You said the policeman left the house because it was dangerous. The police said no such thing in the report. You simply made it up.I've said that it became apparent some time during the incident that the probability of a burglary in progress occurring was remote.
You said he left the house because it was dangerous. You can't keep track of your lies.I'm pretty sure that before he left the house he was convinced there was no longer a danger.
Then you shouldn't be making up about it.What was in the report? Because, I've read it too.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions